Legal Opinion · Dissent

Mary Cocchiarella v. Donald Driggs

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided August 31, 2016No. A14-1876Published

1DissentAnderson, Justice

Minnesota’s lockout statute applies only to the “actual or constructive removal or exclusion of a,residential tenant.” Minn. Stat. § 504B.375, subd. 1(a) (2014). The phrase “residential tenant” is defined as follows:

“Residential tenant” means a person who is occupying a dwelling in a residential building under a lease or contract, whether oral or written, that requires the payment of money or exchange of services, all other regular occupants of that dwelling unit, or a resident of a manufactured home park.

Minn.Stat. § 504B.001, subd. 12 (2014) (emphasis added).

The housing court, the district…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. American Family Insurance Group v. SchroedlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
  2. Park Nicollet Clinic v. HamannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
  3. American Tower, L.P. v. City of GrantSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
  4. Staab v. Diocese of St. CloudSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
  5. State v. RickSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2013

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API